House of Commons Hansard #179 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was children.

Topics

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

NDP

Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS

Madam Speaker, it is amazing to hear a Liberal backbencher talk about poverty when it was his government that gutted the EI system and caused a lot of the problems in this country today.

The fact is that people want to work. Fishermen in the coastal communities and farmers on the prairies want to work. When they could not work they had to rely on the EI system, an EI system that is failing well over 65% of the people in this country. It is not just lone parents and families that break up which are suffering, there are many families with a husband and wife who find it difficult to make ends meet today.

I would like the member to respond to the fact that it was this government's drastic cuts to EI, to satisfy its fiscal objectives and banking needs, which created a huge social deficit in which parented families are greatly suffering as well.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON

Madam Speaker, the EI debate has taken place in the House on many occasions. I will not try to repeat those arguments.

I would rather spend the couple of moments that I have to reiterate to the member that if we are serious about addressing the complex problem of poverty in Canada, one of the most significant elements has to do with the Canadian family. It has to do with the erosion of the Canadian family, the breakdown of the Canadian family, which leads to many broken homes, homelessness and real poverty.

Let us make a commitment now to at least admit that the breakdown of the social and moral fabric in Canada is collectively our fault, which will take our collective will to change.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Jean Dubé Progressive Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Madam Speaker, once again the member opposite, when he talked about education, referred to provincial boundaries. We all know that if our kids are going to survive in this global market they need a better education.

He also spoke about the compassion his government has for broken homes, family split-ups and school dropouts. Let me remind the hon. member that transfer payments to the provinces were slashed by his government. Broken homes, split-ups and dropouts are caused by this government's lack of job creation. That is the real problem with this government.

If the member had control of the EI surplus, if he could decide what to do with the EI surplus, what would he do?

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON

Madam Speaker, we are not here to debate the issues that the member raises. We are here to talk about poverty.

Let me use my one minute to make reference to the Golden report on the homeless in Toronto. It was a very good report.

It was found that half the homeless in Toronto actually had no roots in Toronto. They had migrated from other places across the country. It reminds me of the Field of Dreams statement if you build it, they will come. Toronto's experiences found that yes, they built it and they did come.

Golden tries to suggest that somehow we have preventative strategies to deal with homelessness and with poverty. In fact, their idea of addressing poverty was to mask it. It was to deal with making poverty invisible. It had nothing to do with dealing with the root causes.

The root causes are more fundamental than a tax break because as I said at the beginning of my speech, the poor in Canada do not pay taxes because they do not have income. Tax credits as proposed by the Conservative Party are really an inappropriate approach to dealing with poverty. It is going to take the collective will of all three levels of government as well as the Canadian people to understand that we are the cause of this problem collectively and we collectively must be the solution.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Lynn Myers Liberal Waterloo—Wellington, ON

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to debate this very important motion.

The motion of the hon. member for Shefford states that the government should help to fight poverty in this country by encouraging self-sufficiency and self-reliance. These are excellent goals and underscore several programs and initiatives which we in the federal government have undertaken especially in partnership with the provincial and territorial governments to do precisely that.

The new national child benefit is one of the most obvious examples of this kind of movement. As hon. members know, this initiative came into effect last year following extensive discussions between the federal, provincial and territorial governments on how to most effectively address the issue of child poverty. Even though Canada is one of the most successful and socially advanced countries in the world, the very sad fact is that far too many children in our country still live in poverty.

Poverty is a numbing and degrading experience for anyone, but it is particularly difficult for children. It can mean a child is not only deprived of proper food, clothing and other essentials but also has long term health and social consequences that come up later in life.

In order to address this issue, as of July last year the federal government invested an additional $850 million per year in support of children under the national child benefit. By July 2000 the federal investment will be at least an additional $1.7 billion per year. That is over and above the roughly $5 billion annually the federal government already invests in families with children through the Canada child tax benefit.

As a result of this initiative, more than two million children are receiving higher federal payments each month to help ensure that they have adequate food, clothing and shelter. It will help provide for some of the necessities that children need for a healthy start in life.

What does this have to do with self-sufficiency and self-reliance? It has a great deal to do with it. The problem is that too many parents on social assistance cannot accept a low wage job without penalizing their children. They are often caught behind that infamous welfare wall, meaning that when they move off social assistance and into a job, they can actually end up with fewer benefits and services for their children than what they had received while on social assistance. That truly is a shame. They lose social assistance benefits, things like dental plans, transportation allowances, housing allowances and other supports which come to an end when they take that job.

The new program will help to lower the welfare wall with a higher Canada child tax benefit for all low income families whether they are in the workforce or not. That is an important change. This in turn means that provincial and territorial governments will be able to reduce the amount they pay to families on social assistance.

It is not simply a windfall for the provinces. As part of the deal, provincial and territorial governments have agreed that they will take the money they save and reinvest it in income support and services to help poor families; services such as provincial child benefits, child care support for working parents, basic skills training and other preventative services for children that reflect the needs of individual communities. As a result of the first phase of the national child benefit, most provinces already have these complementary programs in place.

The provinces will also be investing more as a result of the government's commitment to further increase the national child benefit supplement by an additional $850 million per year starting this July and next July. These complementary provincial services range from child benefit and employment supplements for low income recipients to child care tax credits to programs for optical care and prescription drugs for school age children and many other initiatives.

The end result is that more low income parents will be encouraged to get back into the workforce. More children will therefore benefit because of a higher household income.

The government does not suggest for a minute that this new program solves all the problems, not at all. What it does represent is a new beginning, a fresh start if you will, a chance to provide a more comprehensive way to meet the challenge of poverty in this country.

At the same time the government is working to ensure that it has better information on which to base policy decisions, something that is extremely important as our society and the economy undergo the increasingly rapid pace of change that has characterized the past number of decades.

The national longitudinal study of children and youth will be enhanced to provide more specific community based data that will greatly assist all governments in making policy choices that are better targeted and more effective.

The government believes that making an investment in our children and our young people is in our own long term best economic and social interests. Certainly it is. That is why the government has also implemented other measures, such as increasing the deductions for child care expenses, providing a family income supplement for roughly 200,000 low income parents receiving employment insurance benefits, enhancing the community action program for children and putting more emphasis on prenatal nutrition programs for children at risk.

That is also why the government has a number of programs to help Canadians find and keep jobs. The Canada jobs fund is helping to create jobs in high unemployment areas. The youth employment strategy is helping thousands of young Canadians with that all important transition from school to work. We also have a program called employment assistance for persons with disabilities to help those persons with disabilities join and stay in the workforce. The government has also introduced the Canada opportunities strategy that helps more Canadians, young and old, to gain access to a good education and to acquire the skills they need to get a good job.

The government has a clear strategy to fight poverty in this country. Many great initiatives are well under way and are directly addressing the concerns raised in this motion.

The strategy is to get as many people as possible into the workforce, or certainly back into the workforce so that they can earn a living and support themselves and their families. Since 1993 some 1.6 million new jobs have been created in this country. I believe that when the Minister of Finance presents his budget next week, Canadians will see that this government intends to continue to pursue the strategy of job creation and growth which we have done and which has invigorated our economy and helped give more and more Canadians the chance to be full participants in the economic and social life of this great country of ours.

No one should have any doubt that this government is serious about fighting poverty in this country, nor should anyone doubt that this government believes that the best way to do so is to encourage the self-sufficiency and self-reliance referred to in this motion. That is important to note and I think we on all sides of the House should do so.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS

Madam Speaker, I just wanted to ask the hon. member, whom I greatly respect by the way, about the recent letter which was referred to by us last week in the House of Commons. Is one of those programs he talked about the quota that HRDC personnel are now required to meet to take money from EI recipients in order to protect their jobs from the wrath of this government? How is arbitrarily taking people off EI especially in remote communities going to help them feed their families and end child poverty?

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Lynn Myers Liberal Waterloo—Wellington, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

We on the government side have a tremendous record when it comes to issues of poverty, especially child poverty. The kinds of things that we have implemented over time and the kinds of things that we will be implementing over time are truly in the best interests of Canadians wherever they may live.

Canadians understand that what we as a government are doing is in the best interests of everyone. It is done so with compassion and tolerance, knowing that we need to pursue that and ensure that poverty as we know it is eradicated to the best extent possible.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC

Madam Speaker, I listened to the hon. member's thoughtful comments.

One can say one cares, as the hon. member does, and he is undoubtedly sincere, but he is a member of a government that showed no compassion, that did not anticipate the impact on people of its cuts to employment insurance and to transfers.

Let us not forget that it is this government that decided to turn funding for education, health and the Canada assistance plan into a single transfer. Once that was done, the government was quick to reduce federal funding from $19 billion in 1994 down to $11.5 billion. The result is that the provinces had to make cuts in health, education and social assistance.

They are now saying “We will allocate money for the poor. We will help the poor”. People are people. How many have found themselves in dire straits? Poverty is not just a question of money, it is a question of despair, of repeated failure, of dignity, or lack of dignity, as was pointed out.

I would appreciate it if the hon. member could comment.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Lynn Myers Liberal Waterloo—Wellington, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank the member opposite for the question.

I reject out of hand her premise of failure. I reject out of hand her premise of our lacking compassion. On the contrary we have not failed. We do have in place a system of compassion to help Canadians wherever they may live in this great country of ours. We have built in the kinds of programs necessary to assist Canadians and to help them, not only people in poverty and especially our young people, but in all kinds of ways. We have done so through the transfer payment system and will continue to do so in a very meaningful way that underscores our government's commitment to this all important policy area.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Reform

Howard Hilstrom Reform Selkirk—Interlake, MB

Madam Speaker, the government speakers have indicated that the provincial governments were at fault, that it is not really the government's fault as it has great programs.

Over the past 130 years or so that this country has been governed, the Liberal Party has been a big part of it. Where we are at today in child poverty is a direct result of its performance as a government. It cannot avoid responsibility for that.

Besides the broad issues, there is one area which is clearly the responsibility of the federal government and that is aboriginal affairs. Our Indian reserves are pockets of poverty which I have been trying to do something about in my riding.

I ask the member if the tax issues cannot be fixed, can those areas of aboriginal affairs be fixed where there is no accountability for the money that is going into those reserves? People are getting incredibly rich and the poor and the small children are literally starving and in poverty.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Lynn Myers Liberal Waterloo—Wellington, ON

Madam Speaker, of course we have had a long history of helping people and we will continue to do so. We will do so for aboriginals and for all Canadians.

It is interesting that a member from the Reform Party, which stands for opposing every initiative that our government has ever tried to put in place with respect to poverty, including child poverty, would stand in the House and make those kinds of statements.

When we came to the child tax benefit for example, the Reform Party voted against it. When it came to CAPC, the community action program for children, the Reform Party voted against it. When it came to—

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

I must interrupt the hon. member.

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak today on the motion put forward by the hon. member for Shefford, which reads as follows:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should take steps to alleviate the burden of poverty in Canada by encouraging self-sufficiency and self-reliance and, to that end, should increase the basic income tax credit to $10,000, index the tax brackets and index the child tax benefit.

It is a pleasure because, today, we will have an opportunity to debate the issue of poverty in Canada and in every province. I can see that, on the government side, members are very compassionate. They seem to be familiar with the issue and its adverse effects and to know what constituencies are affected by poverty.

My colleague from Mississauga South not only has the gift of the gab, he also has a great deal of compassion, as I heard. Too bad he is not the Prime Minister of Canada. I think he might just implement some of the suggestions made in this motion.

It seems to me that he contradicted something he said earlier. I see him every day applauding the Minister of Human Resources Development and his EI reform. We are aware of the fact that this is a social policy that has taken a serious toll on the public. It has made poverty grow worse day by day.

Compassion is one thing, but action is what is needed. What good is it to recognize and lament the fact that some people cannot afford basic necessities like food and housing, if nothing is done about it. The Liberal government could take a variety of measures to remedy the problem, but it is not taking action. Everyone knows that poverty is growing. There are many more children living in poverty today than there were ten years ago.

The Bloc Quebecois has been actively involved in fighting poverty. I mentioned earlier the employment insurance issue, which is a major social policy. Several of my colleagues have worked on private member's bills that they have introduced in this House. Time and time again, they have suggested various approaches to the government, which brushed all of them off, without any consideration for the effort that had gone into developing these proposals.

Unlike the hon. member for Mississauga South, I congratulate the hon. member for Shefford for bringing this motion to the House today. It allows us to focus on poverty.

It is a motion that is praiseworthy in itself, but we are not in agreement with its wording. We find the motion financially irresponsible. It is all very well to bring in solutions, but they must also be affordable. The main weapons against poverty are not contained in the motion of the hon. member for Shefford.

This morning, the political parties admit that poverty is a real shame. It is time to act, and the Liberal policies in this area have been a total failure. The only ones who can do anything are the Liberals. However, we do not see even a hint of willingness to do something to change the situation.

Yet in 1989, the House unanimously passed the following resolution:

This House express its concern for the more than one million Canadian children currently living in poverty and seek to achieve the goal of eliminating poverty among Canadian children by the year 2000.

We are well aware that the Liberals had a great deal to say on this when in the opposition. They criticized the Progressive Conservative government. Now the shoe is on the other foot and the Progressive Conservatives are criticizing the Liberal government for not attacking poverty.

Ten years later, we have a 60% increase in the number of poor children, to a record high of 1.5 million poor children in Canada.

Each successive government has passed the buck on to the next. I think it was under the Progressive Conservatives that social transfers to the provinces were first reduced and UI eligibility requirements tightened.

These are two enormously important social measures that have a major impact on people, and that play a key role in contributing to poverty if corrective action is not taken.

The Bloc Quebecois is not pulling figures out of a hat and it is not alone in condemning the situation. There are a number of bodies that advise the government and that examine the problem of growing poverty in Canada. The National Council of Welfare, the Canadian Council on Social Development, the UN and Campaign 2000 have criticized the government on several counts and asked it to take action where it could.

The National Council of Welfare is not just any old council. It is a body that advises the federal government on poverty. In a report entitled “Poverty Profile 1996”, it was already identifying poverty as an issue:

Our child poverty is at its highest level in 17 years.

With 20.6%, or 1,481,000, of Canada's children living in poverty, the Liberals are the clear winners when it comes to driving people into poverty. The poverty rate for all categories of families is 14.8%. The rate for single mothers under 65 years of age with children under 18 is 61.4%.

The policies set up by the Liberal government are nothing to brag about. If we look at the figures, the result is rather disastrous.

According to the National Council of Welfare, the decline in government income support programs, particularly social assistance and employment insurance, is the primary cause of poverty. The federal government hurt people in two ways, by reducing transfers to the provinces for social assistance and by making it harder to qualify for employment insurance.

The cuts affecting transfers to the provinces total $42 billion, or $6 billion per year. The National Council of Welfare says that, since the deficit has now been eliminated, the government is in a position to change its approach and to fulfil the commitment it has often made regarding children and their families. This means restoring transfers to the provinces and improving the employment insurance program.

The Canadian Council on Social Development also released a report on progress achieved by Canadian children in 1998. That report is even more scathing. It says that improvements in the lives of Canadian children and young people were offset by negative social and economic patterns. The council blames the bad coverage provided to the unemployed.

So, the Bloc Quebecois is not the only one to condemn the government's attitude regarding transfers to the provinces and employment insurance, with all the restrictions that it has imposed.

The United Nations is also a very important body. It released a report, on December 4, in which it strongly condemned Canada for the rapid deterioration of the living conditions of Canadians. Under the UN's human development index, Canada does not take first place, but only tenth place.

As we all know, Canada prides itself in being the best country in the world, but with figures such as those there is nothing to brag about.

Campaign 2000 is another organization dedicated to fighting poverty in Canada. Its report published in 1998 provides very disturbing figures.

The number of children living in families with incomes under $20,000 has increased by 65%. The number of children living in families experiencing chronic unemployment has increased by 33%. The number of children living in families on social assistance has increased by 51%. The number of children living in low cost but unaffordable housing has increased by 91%.

The government can tell us all it wants about how it is trying to combat child poverty, that it has made it a priority and that its programs take the needs of children and their families into account, but its attitude to the problems of EI and the Canada social transfer put it at the bottom of the class in social policy.

We would like to come back to the member for Shefford's motion and make a few suggestions, because we in the Bloc Quebecois think that she did not go far enough and that her figures are unrealistic. We feel that her motion is financially irresponsible and that the measures proposed do not go far enough.

The motion is financially irresponsible and merely repeats some of the dissenting views of this party with respect to the December report of the Standing Committee on Finance. The Progressive Conservative Party is making suggestions which individually have some merit but collectively would clearly push the Liberal government back into a deficit situation.

I would like to outline the costs associated with this motion of the Progressive Conservative Party. The motion would lower EI premiums by $6 billion without making any improvement to the program. We in the Bloc Quebecois have asked repeatedly that the government improve the system, so that more people can qualify, but this concern is not reflected in the motion put forward by the hon. member for Shefford. At present, 60% of the unemployed are excluded from the EI program. This means that many do not qualify, which contributes to the growth in poverty.

The second suggestion in the hon. member's motion is about fully indexing tax brackets, at a cost of $2 billion. This is in addition to the $6 billion for EI premiums.

She is also asking that the basic income tax credit be increased to $10,000. We know that this would cost $9 billion and that the cost to the public purse per $100 increase—

SupplyGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

The Speaker

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member. She has seven minutes left to complete her speech, which will be followed by a 10-minute question and comment period. Since this would take approximately a quarter of an hour, I think we should now proceed to Statements by Members. The hon. member can resume her speech after Oral Question Period.

RbstStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

John Finlay Liberal Oxford, ON

Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister of Health and Health Canada for their decision to reject the use of rBST in Canadian dairy herds.

As the federal MP for one of the largest dairy producing counties in Canada, I can assure the minister that this decision is a welcome one for dairy farmers in Oxford County. I am especially impressed by Health Canada's diligence in reviewing this product over an nine year period.

The Minister of Health has consistently said that rBST would not be approved if it posed a threat to human or animal health. After studies showed that rBST caused a significant increase by approximately 50% in the incidence of lameness in injected dairy cattle, the department made a clear decision to reject rBST use in Canada. It is a decision which and I and the dairy farmers of Oxford applaud.

TeachingStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Reform

Howard Hilstrom Reform Selkirk—Interlake, MB

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to acknowledge two teachers for their outstanding efforts. These teachers are from the Evergreen School Division, located in the Selkirk—Interlake riding. They have been internationally recognized for their work with special needs students.

John Sarkozi, a resource teacher at Gimli High School, and Brian Thordarson, a resource and classroom teacher at Riverton Early-Middle Years School, were recently awarded the professionally recognized special educator certificate for special education teaching by the Council for Exceptional Children. The Council for Exceptional Children is the largest international professional association for special educators, related service providers and parents.

I take this opportunity to thank those two men and special needs teachers throughout Canada for the extra effort they put forward to educate students with exceptional qualities.

Daniel RehakStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Jean Augustine Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are known around the world for our generosity and our willingness to help countries in the developing world. One Canadian who recently demonstrated this is Mr. Daniel Rehak, a constituent in my riding of Etobicoke—Lakeshore.

As a volunteer with the Canadian Executive Service Overseas, Daniel shared his expertise and knowledge of local area network systems with the vice-ministry of citizens services and municipal development in La Paz, Bolivia. He assisted the ministry in installing server software, local area networks, and in designing other computer programs to enable it to track migration effectively and efficiently.

Daniel's work is typical of Canadians who are motivated to provide services to disadvantaged economies. On behalf of the people of Etobicoke—Lakeshore I congratulate Daniel for his contributions to international development and for a job well done. He makes Canada proud.

Heritage WeekStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Karen Redman Liberal Kitchener Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, this is heritage week in Canada and the theme is honouring Canadian heroes.

I would like to highlight three such heroes in my community of Kitchener Centre. Michael Hildebrand, a Grand River math teacher, will be receiving an award from the governor general for bravery for protecting an 11 year old boy from a black bear attack 18 months ago in Algonquin Park.

The congregation of St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church and the Reverend Grant McDonald this week received a downtown leadership award for their work in the core of our city.

Jessica Smith is an 11 year old who is battling bone cancer in our community. Her good spirits and good humour prove that she is not only a fighter but also a hero.

It is my pleasure to acknowledge these heroes in my community. They are Canadians who are making a difference.

Year 2000Statements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, this week is year 2000 preparedness week. The government is working to assist businesses and consumers to prepare for the year 2000 bug.

The charitable and not for profit sector is also a vital segment of the Canadian economy and can potentially be affected by the year 2000 problem. All the information available to businesses is also available to the not for profit sector, as are many of the support programs provided by the government.

In particular the year 2000 first step program provides a complete diagnostic service for up to 10 computers for a very low cost. I urge the not for profit sector to address the year 2000 problem and to seek information and support from the government by either calling the task force year 2000 secretariat toll free number or by visiting Industry Canada's website.

It is time for all of Canada to act, including the not for profit sector.

Health CareStatements By Members

February 11th, 1999 / 2 p.m.

Reform

Reed Elley Reform Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC

Mr. Speaker, we are facing a major health care crisis in Canada. This is nothing new to the many people who are waiting for surgery or hospital beds or for the doctors, nurses and hospital support staff.

Since 1995 the Liberal government has slashed $16.5 billion from health and social spending. Now it wants to look like a hero by reinstating taxpayers dollars into the health care budget, dollars it took out.

Heroes do not have to create their own situations to look good. The Liberal government is not a hero when it comes to health care. It is the villain.

Through the Liberals charred earth policy Canada's health care is in jeopardy. In British Columbia patients are being placed not in wards but in linen closets. In my riding of Nanaimo—Cowichan the Nanaimo hospital has been suffering greatly. Over the past two weeks it has had a daily average of 50 people waiting for beds.

In one case a 65 year old woman has been cancelled for hip replacement surgery for the third time. Does she have any comfort waiting in her hospital bed? No. She is on morphine waiting in a wheelchair parked in the hallway—

Health CareStatements By Members

2 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Essex.

The Late Shaughnessy CohenStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Susan Whelan Liberal Essex, ON

Mr. Speaker, on December 9, 1998 this Chamber, this institution and all of us suffered a great tragedy over the loss of our colleague Shaughnessy Cohen. To some she was a colleague and to others a dear and trusted friend, but all who knew her instantly saw her vitality for life.

Shaughn lived each and every day to the fullest. We miss her, her laughter, her partisanship and even her heckling.

Today I rise to toast what would have been her 51st birthday. As sure as I am standing here I am certain she is having one heck of a birthday party in Heaven today.

On behalf of her constituents and on behalf of my colleagues I would just like to say happy birthday, Shaughnessy; we miss you.

AgricultureStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Bloc

Jocelyne Girard-Bujold Bloc Jonquière, QC

Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the agricultural producers of Quebec for their efforts, under the leadership of the Laval University economics and agricultural policies research group, are drawing up a portrait of the agro-environmental situation on Quebec farms. This has been under way since 1997, and the assessment of Quebec's 25,000 farms will soon be completed.

This agro-environmental report on farming is a broad survey of agricultural practices and their impacts on soil and water. The data address some 100 different aspects. The data banks can be cross-referenced to numbered maps to give information by MRC, by watershed area or by crop.

The purpose of this one-of-a-kind undertaking is to provide farmers and government with guidance for improving the impact of agriculture on the environment.

Let us congratulate the farmers for protecting their environment, for it is one we all share.

George BrownStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Reform

Rick Casson Reform Lethbridge, AB

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House to join me in honouring broadcasting legend George Brown.

On Saturday night friends of radio in southern Alberta lost a true pioneer. George began his distinguished radio career in Lethbridge in 1939. During World War II he enlisted in the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals where he helped the allied forces intercept enemy communications. After the war George returned to southern Alberta where he embarked on a long and illustrious career on the airwaves.

A dedicated community member, he served on many voluntary boards and societies sharing his talents. George was a distinguished performer himself performing in choral groups across southern Alberta. A member of the Broadcasting Hall of Fame, George reminded us of an era when radio was our window to the world. George used his love and knowledge of music, particularly his love for big band music, to create a bond with the listeners of his unique Sunday morning radio program.

Our prayers and condolences go out to his family. Thank you George, thanks for the musical memories.

Bill C-55Statements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Raymonde Folco Liberal Laval West, QC

Mr. Speaker, for Canada, Bill C-55 is the best solution to a complex situation, for it fully respects our international trade obligations and fits in with our traditional cultural policies.

It will ban a practice which threatens the continuing success of the Canadian periodical industry, namely elimination of Canadian content by offering an unfair advantage to foreign publishers as far as advertising revenues are concerned. This bill protects against price gouging, which already goes on domestically, even in the U.S.

Above all, it maintains fair market conditions for Canadian publishers, without imposing a tax or in any way limiting the content of periodicals, creating subsidies, or limiting readers' choice.

This bill is, therefore, a logical and effective solution.